Killing India’s hidden ‘Cold Start’ strategy

[lionheart1]

http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-affairs/78315-invasion-pakistan-imminent-says-australia.html

US planned to send special forces into Pakistan: Bush | Pakistan | News | Newspaper | Daily | English | Online
BBC News - Clinton warns Pakistan of terror 'consequences'
i dont want say more, remember comments made by (one of the) nato friend
David Cameron and his comment he made in India.

 

[silent hawk]

http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-affairs/78315-invasion-pakistan-imminent-says-australia.html

US planned to send special forces into Pakistan: Bush | Pakistan | News | Newspaper | Daily | English | Online
BBC News - Clinton warns Pakistan of terror 'consequences'
i dont want say more, remember comments made by (one of the) nato friend
David Cameron and his comment he made in India.

This was western gun boat diplomacy which I believe Pakistan handled quite well. You honestly do not believe that they wanted to invade us?

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

a simple, rhetorical question ---

would hindustan be prepared to deal with the inevitable 'reply' and the consequences?

CSD is a failed doctrine because not only Pakistan, but the whole world knows about its existence; same way they know that Pakistan is clear on it's ''first-use'' policy

with our AEW&C capability, you have fewer advantages now and a hell of a lot less time to act


i think it's also immature (and funny) to think that india has time to engage in hostile activities BEFORE war would escalate. I think that's pure nonsense, and the indians and their military planners should be smarter than to engage in empty chest-thumping

 

[lionheart1]

This was western gun boat diplomacy which I believe Pakistan handled quite well. You honestly do not believe that they wanted to invade us?

time will tell, it depends on pakistani attitude towards terrorism

 

[silent hawk]

time will tell, it depends on pakistani attitude towards terrorism

No one invades these days my friend. Even the great US is pulling out of countries it invaded.

Invasions are history. Inflicting Pain and Punishment is in Fashion these days.

 

[lionheart1]

a simple, rhetorical question ---

would hindustan be prepared to deal with the inevitable 'reply' and the consequences?

CSD is a failed doctrine because not only Pakistan, but the whole world knows about its existence; same way they know that Pakistan is clear on it's ''first-use'' policy

with our AEW&C capability, you have fewer advantages now and a hell of a lot less time to act


i think it's also immature (and funny) to think that india has time to engage in hostile activities BEFORE war would escalate. I think that's pure nonsense, and the indians and their military planners should be smarter than to engage in empty chest-thumping

that why we are arming to the teeth our defense budget is 1lakh 47 thousand crore (34 billion dollar, when rupee was 47 ) .

 

[gubbi]

would hindustan be prepared to deal with the inevitable 'reply' and the consequences?

Yes.

It would be a political decision in India to declare war. A consensus political decision across the wide political spectrum of democratic India. The military does not take decisions. CSD is specifically tailored NOT to cross Pakistani nuclear threshold. Pakistan's threshold is not that low as many would love to believe and they too know the consequences of trying to launch a missile (a conventional or a nuclear one).

Do you honestly think that Indian political bosses are that stupid to not weigh the pros and cons of any strategy they would employ?

Secondly, contrary to a popular held belief, CSD is but a defensive doctrine. It would be initiated only if Pakistan attacks or in worst case scenario, the political bosses think that pros out weigh cons in case there happens to be another terrorist attack in India originating from Pakistan with a tacit understanding of Pakistani military establishment.

CSD is a failed doctrine because not only Pakistan, but the whole world knows about its existence; same way they know that Pakistan is clear on it's ''first-use'' policy

A double edged sword, with the sharpest edge closer to your own necks than you would believe.

i think it's also immature (and funny) to think that india has time to engage in hostile activities BEFORE war would escalate. I think that's pure nonsense, and the indians and their military planners should be smarter than to engage in empty chest-thumping

Pakistan cannot afford to escalate any conflict. Thats the reality, no matter what one is fed or wants to believe.

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

that why we are arming to the teeth our defense budget is 1lakh 47 thousand crore (34 billion dollar, when rupee was 47 ) .

still doesnt answer my question, does it?

history has proven that Pakistan proved to give quite a 'welcoming' reception to the indians

Pakistan hasn't been sitting idly twiddling thumbs while india has been doing her own procurements

 

[silent hawk]

Yes.

It would be a political decision in India to declare war. A consensus political decision across the wide political spectrum of democratic India. The military does not take decisions. CSD is specifically tailored NOT to cross Pakistani nuclear threshold. Pakistan's threshold is not that low as many would love to believe and they too know the consequences of trying to launch a missile (a conventional or a nuclear one).

Do you honestly think that Indian political bosses are that stupid to not weigh the pros and cons of any strategy they would employ?

Secondly, contrary to a popular held belief, CSD is but a defensive doctrine. It would be initiated only if Pakistan attacks or in worst case scenario, the political bosses think that pros out weigh cons in case there happens to be another terrorist attack in India originating from Pakistan with a tacit understanding of Pakistani military establishment.

A double edged sword, with the sharpest edge closer to your own necks than you would believe.

Pakistan cannot afford to escalate any conflict. Thats the reality, no matter what one is fed or wants to believe.

I am amazed that India and Indians can even contemplate that an eight times smaller Pakistan is going to attack.

Its like a twenty four year old young lad being afraid of a three year kid.

 

[gubbi]

I am amazed that India and Indians can even contemplate that an eight times smaller Pakistan is going to attack.

Read history on Indo-Pak conflicts. From well reputed neutral sources. Then tell me who initiated every one of the conflicts.

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

Do you honestly think that Indian political bosses are that stupid to not weigh the pros and cons of any strategy they would employ?

well it seems quite bizarre that your MMS does his best to be a 'statsmen' while your previous army chief was talking about war on 2 fronts (for whatever that was worth)

the cons would certainly outweigh the pros; and even if they didn't, I don't think it would be very wise of the indians to 'test' our patience --which became quite thin especially after all the drama and theatrics post 26/11

Secondly, contrary to a popular held belief, CSD is but a defensive doctrine. It would be initiated only if Pakistan attacks or in worst case scenario, the political bosses think that pros out weigh cons in case there happens to be another terrorist attack in India originating from Pakistan with a tacit understanding of Pakistani military establishment.

Pakistan would probably only attack if it felt threatened at any point and had no option but to take action --keeping in mind all other considerations

india has failed to prove any such ''tacit understanding'' though of course the standard indian will believe whatever he/she wants to --can't really alter their dogmatically held views, nor do we really care to

A double edged sword, with the sharpest edge closer to your own necks than you would believe.

you must be talking about hindustan with respect to CSD

Pakistan cannot afford to escalate any conflict. Thats the reality, no matter what one is fed or wants to believe.

Pakistan would be playing a defensive role with homefield advantage.

in such a hypothetical situation, it is india that would be escalating hostilities

i personally don't believe they would have much success in such a scenario, and it would be quite foolish of them to even think of such an endeavor --- not to say that Pakistan isn't prepared for such (as demonstrated by High Mark and other recent exercises --or its ability to mobilize en masse the way it did in 2002); not to say that i would hold it against the indians for dreaming --which I not only condone for them, but would actually encourage, as they are quite good at it!

 

[Gandhi G in da house]

well it seems quite bizarre that your MMS does his best to be a 'statsmen' while your previous army chief was talking about war on 2 fronts (for whatever that was worth)

the cons would certainly outweigh the pros; and even if they didn't, I don't think it would be very wise of the indians to 'test' our patience --which became quite thin especially after all the drama and theatrics post 26/11



Pakistan would probably only attack if it felt threatened at any point and had no option but to take action --keeping in mind all other considerations

india has failed to prove any such ''tacit understanding'' though of course the standard indian will believe whatever he/she wants to --can't really alter their dogmatically held views, nor do we really care to




you must be talking about hindustan with respect to CSD




Pakistan would be playing a defensive role with homefield advantage.

in such a hypothetical situation, it is india that would be escalating hostilities

i personally don't believe they would have much success in such a scenario, and it would be quite foolish of them to even think of such an endeavor --- not to say that Pakistan isn't prepared for such (as demonstrated by High Mark and other recent exercises --or its ability to mobilize en masse the way it did in 2002); not to say that i would hold it against the indians for dreaming --which I not only condone for them, but would actually encourage, as they are quite good at it!

I like your confidence .

 

[prototype]

still doesnt answer my question, does it?

history has proven that Pakistan proved to give quite a 'welcoming' reception to the indians

Pakistan hasn't been sitting idly twiddling thumbs while india has been doing her own procurements

thats because u r used to the twisted version of history from Pakistani textbooks,just collect data from some neutral source to know the actual history,and u r not going to enjoy it

 

[gubbi]

well it seems quite bizarre that your MMS does his best to be a 'statsmen' while your previous army chief was talking about war on 2 fronts (for whatever that was worth)

That is the kind of reply one posts when one takes things out of context and yet tries to connect the two together.

Show me where MMS has failed as a statesman. As for the Army Chief's statements, thats his job! His job is to assure the people of India that the responsibility accorded to him by the elected GoI to lead the armed forces is being carried out ably. His job is to assure that in case there is a two front war, Indian armed forces are able and capable to handle such situations.

I ask you this, have you read the reports of the statement? The statement says that Indian forces should be and will be prepared for a two front war thrust upon it, and NOT open a two front war. Dont take things out of context. Never makes any sense.

the cons would certainly outweigh the pros; and even if they didn't, I don't think it would be very wise of the indians to 'test' our patience --which became quite thin especially after all the drama and theatrics post 26/11

All that "drama and theatrics" had the desired effect! Without moving any of our forces, without firing a single bullet, India forced pakistan to accept that the perpetrators were Pakistanis, that the plot was hatched in Pakistan and that the groups belonged to Pakistan- once nourished by Pakistani establishment.

You armed forces were on very high alert and flew numerous CAPS over major Pakistani cities, while Indian personnel were having a hearty laugh at the jittery responses from Pakistani establishment.

Pakistan would probably only attack if it felt threatened at any point and had no option but to take action --keeping in mind all other considerations

True. But then the question arises, why would India want Pakistan to attack? Conspiracy theorists -have a go at it

india has failed to prove any such ''tacit understanding'' though of course the standard indian will believe whatever he/she wants to --can't really alter their dogmatically held views, nor do we really care to

Have you read those wikileaks reports? How your establishment is involved in funding and supporting various groups? Havent you read Mushraff's latest statement about anti-India terrorist groups?

Though I have to give it to you that, if one were to believe official reports and ground situation, Pakistani establishment has sort of washed its hands off these groups officially. But one wouldnt rule of support for these by some 'rouge' elements in Pakistani establishment.

Pakistan would be playing a defensive role with homefield advantage.
in such a hypothetical situation, it is india that would be escalating hostilities

True that. However homefield advantage evaporates if one doesnt know where and when the attacks would commence.
Didnt PAF neutralize home field advantage of IAF when they did a pre-emptive strike in 1971 precipitating the conflict?

i personally don't believe they would have much success in such a scenario, and it would be quite foolish of them to even think of such an endeavor --- not to say that Pakistan isn't prepared for such (as demonstrated by High Mark and other recent exercises --or its ability to mobilize en masse the way it did in 2002);

Thats your personal point of view. But there are far more qualified and able think tanks and brilliant strategists (unlike some who are at the most ordinary field tacticians without any understanding, whatsoever, of political strategies) who take into account every conceivable practical and imaginary scenarios before formulating the strategy.

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

facts are facts; back home in Peshawar, i have breakfast lunch and dinner with somebody who fought in 65 and 71 and I have more access to corroborated facts (in the form of living vets, active and retired colleagues, and other sources i need not mention here)

not sure why you need to yap about school textbooks when I am a person who has books on the shelf written by even hindustanys who themselves have credited Pakistan with the way many of the battles were fought, and, to their credit, do their best to give a neutral perspective

and yes --- battles is the correct terminology here